26 Oct The UM is for All Lovers of Truth
I have just completed reading the first two of the three systems of the new UM project of Dean Sessions. I am greatly impressed and delighted by what I found. It was like seeing an exciting, powerful new movie that deals with some of my favorite topics and concerns. To specifics:
1. Sessions is right on in pointing out that much of present day science is theory oriented rather than being fact oriented as it should be. For many scientists, theory is more important than law. Scientific laws are demonstrated by facts, but theories cannot be demonstrated by facts. There are always an infinite number of possible theoretical explanations for any finite set of facts. Theories can be eliminated by facts, but only if the persons involved in evaluating them will make the correct application: face the facts. When a theory is an article of faith, many people refuse to apply the pertinent facts which should cause them to abandon a particular theory. Sessions has called attention to specific facts and laws which should cause any honest person to reject the theories of organic evolution, the great age of fossils, the magma theory of the history of the earth, etc. How refreshing to see such candor in scientific thinking!
2. Sessions is also correct in showing that technology is as important as scientific theorizing. Technology enabled the work of Galileo to establish the helio-centric theory of the solar system, much to the consternation of the self-appointed scientists of his day. Sessions has shown by technology how granite rock is actually formed, as well as other minerals. He has shown how fossils are formed, such as petrified wood. Diamonds are now produced by technology. All of these technical achievements create facts and laws which every honest scientist must recognize and apply to theories affected by them. Technology trumps scientific theory because technology demonstrates what is (facts), whereas scientific theory only muses on what might be. Theory in science is actually metaphysics, not physics. Only when substantiated by facts and laws do theories become acceptable, and are always subject to elimination if new facts and laws come forth to negate them. Sessions has done an admirable job of showing how some present theoretical darlings of some scientists must be rejected.
3. Session’s discussions of hydrofountains, hypretherms, the Universal Flood, organic evolution, fossils, climate, history, anthropology, etc., are all refreshing and challenging. Reading this book is having one’s imagination stretched at every turn. Every serious reader who has an interest in knowing the truth will be delighted with the challenging ideas found here.
Will there be criticisms of this work? Most certainly. What form will they take?
1.One will be ignoring this work and discouraging others from reading it. Just as the politicians in charge try to marginalize everyone who is not “politically correct,” so will influential members of the science community try to ignore and belittle this work. But every honest seeker after truth will relish the opportunity to think freshly about important scientific matters, in a refined paradigm of science, and with new facts and laws to ponder.
2. Some critics will say that this work should be ignored or discounted because the author, Dean Sessions, is not a professional scientist and does not have the “necessary” academic background to propound such a work. This attitude is rubbish, of course. That is like saying someone cannot run fast because they are not part of an official Olympic Team. The proof of science is not in who says it but in the physical evidence brought to bear in evaluating our ideas about this physical world we live in. Sessions is right in pointing out that theory (which cannot be proved, but can be falsified) has become more important to many current scientists than are facts. The great example of this is the theory of organic evolution which is the darling of much of academia right now and which is completely unsupported by the facts, specifically the fact that there is no observable speciation in nature. That plus the inability to prove the immense time frame necessary for the theory spell the death-knell for the theory of organic evolution for every honest person. But evolution is a religion, a matter of faith for many persons, and they would rather give up their honesty than give up their favorite irrational article of faith.
3. Some will say that Sessions has picked and chosen very carefully the quotations of other writers which he cites to support his case. But that is not a fault. Every person picks and chooses among potential citations, a necessity in the flood of writings about every topic. What is most remarkable and commendable is the breadth and depth of the scholarship which Sessions exhibits in his writing. He has searched the literature of many fields of endeavor with exciting and telling results. Most people know the literature only in their own field. Sessions has no primary field and delves into what others have said from all the fields he deals with to help his readers realize what is being said and not said in the areas of his interest. Be grateful he has been selective and brings to you a summary of what others are saying.
4. Sessions will possibly be proved wrong about some assertions he has made in his work. This is almost inevitable for anyone doing serious thinking and writing. But the finding of such errors will not be an embarrassment for Sessions. He will laud such finding, because that will mean that the cause of truth will be advanced. His purpose is to bring truth and light to important matters, and if his work stimulates others to produce more truth and light, even unto showing his work needs to be amended, he will be grateful. He will be grateful because he writes not to give the final word but to further the ongoing human inquiry into the powerful ideas about the true nature of the universe that give us all more understanding and power.
I commend this work for all serious thinkers and lovers of truth. You will be challenged in reading the material. It is not “light” reading. But any effort will be well worth it.
Chauncey C. Riddle, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Brigham Young University, USA